2015 RS

[spydaman60]

I'm on Team Faran here. Pardon my broken record, but as I've written elsewhere, my bet is that the RS is going one of three places:

1. Cheaper.

2. Leaner.

3. Away.

just think what they'll be worth if it's what's behind door number three!

[DragonLorD]

just think what they'll be worth if it's what's behind door number three!

good point
i'd actually welcome that, stop making them if you can't get them right!

[daveinva]

1. - how? there is cheaper Chinese version already - junk

There's a far world of difference from a, say, $9500 stripped Spyder and a $4500 Chinese POS.

2. - why? what's the gain? - wanna lean?, - get a 2 wheeler. leaning trike never made sense, is butt ugly and can't have a frunk, at least not equal frunk to Spyder

Why? Because it's fun?

You also can't say it's butt ugly, since no one has seen what a leaning Spyder would look like. My guess is it'd look pretty close to what the current one looks like. And you can still design a frunk around a leaning architecture-- it *might* be smaller (one helmet's worth of storage versus two), or it might not. Again, we have no idea how BRP would design it. We just know they're *thinking* about it.

3. - well if it's not gonna get what it needs, better off let it go

You and I, and everyone else for that matter, have our own definitions of what the RS "needs." I'm actually quite happy with the RS as designed, I've loved mine since I bought it. Would I like some improvements? Of course, who wouldn't? But these wishlist threads are all the same: a lot of very personal opinions that unfortunately ALL can't be simultaneously accommodated by any one design, certainly not at a price that can be supported by the limited marketplace for sporty three-wheeled reverse trikes.

[daveinva]

Okay, since we're on the subject, let's design a "stripper" model Spyder RS. What do we take off?

-- Electronics? I don't think you can lose the Nanny with the current design. You might be able to lose the Nanny with a *leaning* Spyder, however, but you'd probably make up whatever $$$ you save by ditching the electronics with the price and complexity of a leaning suspension.

Perhaps Bosch can make their tech cheaper, but I doubt there's a lot of margin here.

-- Stock parts? BRP already makes generous use of their Ski-Doo/Sea-Doo parts bin for the Spyder, so don't know if you can save much $$$ there.

-- Engine? Easy win here, but if they go with a smaller engine, they have to save weight elsewhere to keep performance competitive. Tough to save weight while saving money, i.e. the cheapest parts are usually made from the heaviest materials. Does Rotax make any *air cooled* engines? Might be a way to save $$$ and weight.

-- Tupperware? Junk as much as you can, saves weight and money. Unfortunately, the current Spyder isn't designed to be naked, so losing the tupperware would require a major redesign of chassis & engine bay.

-- Wheels? Could save a few bucks going for cheaper wheels/rims, but not much.

-- Transmission? Obviously, a manual saves plenty of money over an SE. But they could also go a third route, and simply plug in a CVT as your "auto" option for the RS. I imagine a scooter-grade CVT could be less expensive than the SE semi-auto they use now.

-- Frunk? I don't imagine it's a big cost driver, but it's a big chunk of plastic, so losing the frunk would surely save a few bucks. Yeah, it's always been a key part of the Spyder charm, but again, we're trying to make an "entry level" Spyder, and we need to save money every place we can find.

Honestly? I think you could get the base RS under $10K, but probably not by much. Unfortunately, the compromises in quality, performance and features might not make such a beast very attractive. Surely BRP has done the market research to the Nth degree, but I'd be surprised if price was really the biggest hurdle for potential Spyder owners to overcome. The Spyder is the textbook example of a vehicle that you either want, or you don't, and price is secondary.

That all said, again, I do think the best path for the RS is the leaner. Just as when you talk to the Goldwing/HD riders about what it will take them to get to switch to an RT-- and no surprise, it's what you get in the 2014 RT-- the thing you hear from younger two-wheel riders is that the Spyder RS has the stigma of a vehicle you ride *if you can't ride* two wheels, i.e. you're old, you're infirm, you're a bad two-wheel rider, or you're just scared because you're wuss, etc. Those riders want the lean-- they want that feeling in the corners, and they won't give it up unless they have to.

Build the RS to give them that lean, and voila, you've got interest from the two-wheel crowd to match the same interest the RT-- and especially the *2014* RT-- can generate from the Goldwing/HD touring crowd.

[Web Runner]

Ok, I'll add to the mix...I am really happy with my RS and have it customized nicely. I don't have any plans on purchasing a newer model at all. So, what I would like is a software update for better gas mileage. Is it possible to do that with the Rotax 990?

[Flanker]

Personally I see two options for the RS


1. Entry-level model. If they could create one from $6000-10,000 (OK, $6k is probably pushing it), it seems like there would be a whole new market. I'm not exactly sure what they would compromise to get there, but what the heck. We're having magic wands here anyway.

2. Leaning and/or Turbo Spyder. Eventually you gotta think they are gonna come out with some kind of a leaning model. Even a little bit. And the RS is the model it makes the most sense on, IMHO. And of course, if they come out with a turbo model, the RS is almost the only model that it makes sense on.

Until then, I'm still seriously happy with my 2011 RSS that is reliable, fast enough, and simple. Yeah, I want built-in tunes and heated hand grips and more range and a little more storage. But I'm years away from an RT.

Oooh. But having said that, maybe the third option is an RS with more range and a few more creature comforts. Really, BRP. 180-200 miles a tank. Offer us heated grips. We're not all that picky.

Good points; they've already got two sub models; though the RSS is really just a cosmetic step up. I've never been a big fan of turbos or supercharged motorcycles (Spyders in our case), and suggestions that 175 hp would be a good target (certainly an appropriate improvement over the currently anemic offering) are under-ambitious. Keep in mind...............Porky Pig (aka the RSS) weighs well in excess of 700 lbs.

Firstly; turbos and superchargers aren't necessary. Well over 200 HP is easily achievable in normally aspirated form with current engine tech. My 2007 ZX14 has only an exhaust and dyno mapped PCIII..............the test mule at Kyle Racing dynoed at 185+ RWHP. My bike weighs right around 530 lbs wet. Acceleration is to say the least. On the other hand the ZX is like all other motor vehicles.....................isn't doesn't go any faster, or quicker than I make it go. 99% of my riding is within 5-10 MPH of the posted limit, and my lifetime (17,500+ miles) MPG is 37+.



Accounting for mechanical driveline loss......................that's 200 HP at the crank. No turbo or supercharger needed. Throw in a 1450 or 1500 cc kit and a set of cams.............220-230 crankshaft HP with no sweat. There is a valid economy argument to be made for turbocharging....................you can go with a smaller more fuel efficient engine, and still get the peak HP and torque numbers of a larger normally aspirated motor, however that's at the cost of computerized complexity and cost or the control systems. Two things easily avoidable with normally aspirated motors.

Turbo complexity and it's cousins. My bud had an '02 Hayabusa with a 5 stage computer controlled turbo system expertly integrated into a purpose built turbo compatible motor. LOTS of extra plumbing, weight, wiring, and a WHOLE lotta CPUing to tie it all together. It worked well (as defined by mondo HP, little to no turbo lag), and featured eye ball flattening, arm straightening, and primary organ shriveling (regardless of gender!) performance. 478 RWHP/570 lbs will do that. It was very difficult to ride, however, for obvious reasons.

You want better mileage....................a 6 or 7 speed tranny nicely compliments 200 + HP and the torque that comes with it. That brings us to drivelines. Even at the other posters target RSS HP of 175................I'm thinking the belt's gotta go. I like the belt on my RSS, it is quieter than any chain drive I've had; I just don't think it'll handle (especially in a driveline of the Spyder's impressive length) the HP or torque we're kicking around here.

You want better mileage...................get rid of the pork in the Spyder. Weight affects acceleration, mileage, and handling. Weight reduction becomes even more imperative, given any of the engine improvements being talked about are going to add HP, torque, and more weight. If you think your RSS handles nicely now (and I do); you'd be amazed at it's handling with even 50-60 lbs less weight to deal with. I'd like to see a target of 125 lbs in weight reduction traded off against the weight increase of the engine/tranny combo.

The nanny needs to go! There is no good reason at least the TC and VSS aren't defeatable. I can shut off both in my car, and the two previous cars I've owned with TC...............you could shut it off in those too. Even better; I'd like to see a software modulated power application program and switching system. Besides; everyone of us is born with traction control (at least real riders are). It's on the end of our right arms. Nuff said!

Wheels and tires need to be automotive standard stuff. A 5 lug bolt pattern (anything from GM or Ford will do!) with 16 or 17 inch light weight rims would allow the use of commensurately sized brake rotors and calipers in standard motorcycling dimensions. That's right......................think of your wheel and braking options if we didn't have the current tiny, goofy three lug spindle, and the odd size braking components to accommodate them? Sweet

200+ RWHP, 6 speed tranny with chain drive, defeatable TC & VSS, 125lbs less blubber, and standard 5 lug spindles with 16 or 17 inch rims/corresponding motorcycle standard rotors and calipers = FrankenSpyder!

And as Faran, and others have suggested; have lesser versions of that beast for the customer who isn't interested in that performance or price point. It's very likely BRP would see RSS sales shoot dramatically upward with a 3-4 vehicle (of varying performance/trim levels) menu of RSSs. Which would likely attract a new, younger financially well healed customer demographic who'd become loyal Spyder riders for many years before they descended into the chrome plated lobster abyss. Just sayin'......................

[DragonLorD]

There's a far world of difference from a, say, $9500 stripped Spyder and a $4500 Chinese POS.



Why? Because it's fun?

You also can't say it's butt ugly, since no one has seen what a leaning Spyder would look like. My guess is it'd look pretty close to what the current one looks like. And you can still design a frunk around a leaning architecture-- it *might* be smaller (one helmet's worth of storage versus two), or it might not. Again, we have no idea how BRP would design it. We just know they're *thinking* about it.



You and I, and everyone else for that matter, have our own definitions of what the RS "needs." I'm actually quite happy with the RS as designed, I've loved mine since I bought it. Would I like some improvements? Of course, who wouldn't? But these wishlist threads are all the same: a lot of very personal opinions that unfortunately ALL can't be simultaneously accommodated by any one design, certainly not at a price that can be supported by the limited marketplace for sporty three-wheeled reverse trikes.

1. - sure is, although can't see it happening, logistic of Spyder equals logistics of a car - cost of transport, assembly, etc... where logistics of 2 wheelers are halved, thats why we have much more sophisticated, reliable etc 2 wheelers on the market for half of the Spyder money. what exactly could be stripped on current Spyder to reduce a price then ? It's built cheaply, from cheap materials, no stainless steel, chrome or high end suspension or exhaust system, belt power transfer, list goes on. Don't get me wrong - i love my Spyder for many reasons but one thing Spyder really is not is built sophistically or from high quality parts/materials therefore i see no room to strip anything anywhere on actual unit. Major part of price of these machines is down to logistics - unfortunately.
2. - fun? - challenge more so, danger too. leaning trike gives no advantage or fun over 2 wheeler so what would be the point build one in first place? so many kits out there for decades for leaning trikes, cheap too and this concept still never took off. Sure it won't hurt me if BRP comes up with one, i just won't be interested myself, that's for sure
bottom line is that current Spyder tweaked to a leaner = mission impossible - so many things are wrong in that regards they have to start from scratch - frame, links, weight, width, clearance,

3. - well obviously, was reffering to leaning reverse trikes out there - they all look so wrong and none has a frunk .

As you said- everyone to their own, sure we'll see what future brings, nothing to loose

[daveinva]

Good points; they've already got two sub models; though the RSS is really just a cosmetic step up. I've never been a big fan of turbos or supercharged motorcycles (Spyders in our case), and suggestions that 175 hp would be a good target (certainly an appropriate improvement over the currently anemic offering) are under-ambitious. Keep in mind...............Porky Pig (aka the RSS) weighs well in excess of 700 lbs.

And still accelerates quite fast, and hits extra-legal speeds quite fast. Faster than most cars, slower than some motorcycles. Hardly anemic.

You want better mileage....................a 6 or 7 speed tranny nicely compliments 200 + HP and the torque that comes with it. That brings us to drivelines. Even at the other posters target RSS HP of 175................I'm thinking the belt's gotta go. I like the belt on my RSS, it is quieter than any chain drive I've had; I just don't think it'll handle (especially in a driveline of the Spyder's impressive length) the HP or torque we're kicking around here.

And then you've built two different final drives between three bikes, raising the price of the RS not only for the added cost of whatever replaces it, but also losing the savings from amortizing one single belt drive design across three Spyder models.

Remember: every time you use a different part on a Spyder model, it costs BRP-- and thus the consumer-- more money.

The nanny needs to go! There is no good reason at least the TC and VSS aren't defeatable.

Sure there is: the Spyder is dangerously unrideable without it.

At least that's what the BRP and Bosch engineers have repeatedly stated. They get paid more than I do to perform all the testing, perhaps I'm foolish to trust their judgment during years of development.

The VSS isn't something optional, like it is on a car or two-wheels. It's there to make a *reverse trike* perform best at the limits of performance.

Again, pray tell, what sort of riding do you do that the Nanny interferes with? In my experience, a Spyder RS with an upgraded sway bar, shocks and a skilled rider who gets off their a$$ in corners does NOT trip the Nanny unless something goes pear-shaped. Meaning, the very few times I've tripped the Nanny, I *really frakkin' needed* the Nanny.

I don't want to rehash this debate in every thread-- honest!-- but here's one simple request: every person who writes that they don't want the Nanny on their bike because they don't need it should produce their BUDS report for the class to peruse so we can see how many times the Nanny engaged on their bike.

Anyway, judging by the preliminary reports for the 2014 models, the Nanny appears to have been relaxed on the RS, so hopefully that'll address some of your concerns about its intrusiveness, Flanker.

[daveinva]

2. - fun? - challenge more so, danger too. leaning trike gives no advantage or fun over 2 wheeler so what would be the point build one in first place?

Of course it has an advantage: stability, the same reason why the Spyder exists in the first place.

And leaning through turns is fun. That's why a lot of people ride, after all, and it's a sacrifice those riders have to make in order to own a Spyder in its current incarnation.

so many kits out there for decades for leaning trikes, cheap too and this concept still never took off.

And the concept for a reverse trike from the factory never took off, either... until BRP built them.

bottom line is that current Spyder tweaked to a leaner = mission impossible - so many things are wrong in that regards they have to start from scratch - frame, links, weight, width, clearance,

I disagree. And so does BRP. http://www.autoevolution.com/news/br...led-31205.html

As you said- everyone to their own, sure we'll see what future brings, nothing to loose

Agree with you there! Safe riding...

[DragonLorD]

Stability? - Current Spyder = Absolutely!, Stability on leaning trike? = wishful thinking , what exactly is the stability factor here?



And the concept for a reverse trike from the factory never took off, either... until BRP built them.
BRP put wheels on a SkiDoo



I disagree. And so does BRP. http://www.autoevolution.com/news/br...led-31205.html
OMG - now imagine cost of that - and the troubles with even more electronics - here comes a limp mode


Single plain reason why Younger riders don't by a Spyder is Performance, Spyder simple can't keep up with other bikes and that's the fact
From my point of view : Leaning trike brings no one in, what is the point pay triple money, leaning controlled/limited with computer, gain nothing extra over 2 wheeler and look like a crippled bug? - only then i won't be surprised to be looked at as at someone who can't handle 2 wheeler, for sure

[daveinva]

Stability? - Current Spyder = Absolutely!, Stability on leaning trike? = wishful thinking , what exactly is the stability factor here?

Three points of contact to the ground > two points of contact to the ground.

An MP3, for example, is quite stable, and more so than two wheels. Go ahead and ride one over road debris, potholes and the like and compare those two wheels up front to one.

If you spread out the front wheels even more-- to, say, the current width of a Spyder's front wheels-- you further increase the stability.

The issue then, of course, is that you have to design a suspension/differential, and quite possibly a VSS/TCS, that helps manage performance.

But that's not hard. Differentials are ancient technology. And someone, somewhere recently invented a pretty darn good VSS/TCS system... I forget which company that was?

BRP put wheels on a SkiDoo

No, they did not.

OMG - now imagine cost of that - and the troubles with even more electronics - here comes a limp mode

Or not. The vast majority of Spyders today work just fine, there's no reason to think this isn't a technically-feasible design. Or at least, you haven't offered one yet.

Single plain reason why Younger riders don't by a Spyder is Performance, Spyder simple can't keep up with other bikes and that's the fact

Opinions are not facts. We've each offered ours, but again, BRP surely has done the market research about what appeals to which demographic, and will build their vehicles accordingly.

From my point of view : Leaning trike brings no one in, what is the point pay triple money, leaning controlled/limited with computer, gain nothing extra over 2 wheeler and look like a crippled bug? - only then i won't be surprised to be looked at as at someone who can't handle 2 wheeler, for sure

Triple money? As long as we're making uninformed guesses, why not quadruple money? Or quintuple??

Gain nothing over a 2 wheeler? Again, stability.

Look like a cripple bug? You and I have no idea what a leaning Spyder would look like, but I see no reason why it wouldn't look similar to the current Spyder.

Anyway, in the interest of international comity, I'll cease my defense of the hypothetical, and just offer my hope that BRP builds an RS that satisfies all of your wishes and desires!

[DragonLorD]

we are working on very different fields buddy

Differential? i missed where we skipped onto front wheel drive altogether and i also never knew that to increase stability i had to increase points of contacts ; never mind anything else - my bad i guess

[Flanker]

I'm actually quite happy with the RS as designed

I never would've guessed.

It is a good machine, it's fun, moderately fast, I like mine. I'd like A LOT MORE THOUGH; I don't expect any, however, and ALMT is obviously not everyone's flavor. All the more reason to increase the product sub-line (RS/RSSs) and likely the new customers that would be attracted to it. On the off chance they do some day produce a FrankenSpyder, or some variation thereof....................you won't be allowed to buy one; as you're actually quite happy with the RS as designed. Aaaaaahhhhh an entire 100 HP. An amount not witnessed by humanity until the Japanese started making 600 cc sport bikes.

I've only activated the nanny under two conditions. Can't do burn outs worth a on it when it starts to side step. Can't do donuts worth a on it either. Defeatable VSS and TC give one the option of living with them or not. For those who're satisfied with things as they're designed.........................the safe route is to leave it on, I guess. The VSS is likely on the Spyder for two reasons. It almost certainly does make the Spyder safer (man, that word is popping up a lot!) under some conditions. The second is BRP has not failed to notice the complete dearth of three wheeled ATVs in the US. I'm sure some remember them. They used to exist before morons everywhere and the ambulance chasers who lined up behind them sued the three wheeled ATVs out of production because they were unsafe for morons to operate like morons. Can you say, "Product Liability"? VSS is a self defensive measure for BRP, and it does make the Spyder safer......................for them. I don't resent that; it's a valid fear, or concern, on their part when dealing with a US customer base, ..................and all the ambulance chasers behind them.

I've had two high speed motorcycle accidents (in excess of 60 MPH), one of which involved a rather uncooperative tree, one medium speed accident (ATV-4 wheeled kind............but only because there were no three wheelers to be owned by then) also involving a tree (gotta work on NOT doing that), and one really stupid low speed accident. Whatever costs insurance didn't pay, I did. The low speeder cost me about $22,000.00 out of pocket. I wasn't very happy with myself for that one. I could have lawyered up on any of them I suppose, but in the end the only real common causative factor was the moron operating the throttle. Unlike most; I didn't sue anyone else for my mistakes. No one had to put additional cautionary or disclaimer decals on their product because of me.

OMG!!!!! I hadn't thought about the huge additional cost of putting a convertible mount on the output shaft so you either mount a flange and belt, or a sprocket and chain. That would really be over the cost edge, on 220 HP Spyder with carbon fiber, titanium, magnesium, and aluminum all over it to get it's blubber down. Point taken.

Did I mention I actually like my RSS, and it's a lot of fun to ride? Because it is..................but it would be A LOT MORE FUN though with A LOT MORE! It's the American way! I don't think my wish list is that outrageous; it'd really be kinda like the ZR1, or Viper model of Spyder.

One other thing.....................they really need to attract more A LOT MORE younger riders because their current customer base is DIEING before their very eyes. Kinda like Buick owners.

OK..................I'm off my soap box now; gotta go ride my bicycle into a tree..........................oh wait; I said bicycle; won't be going that fast. How much CAN it hurt?

200+ RWHP, 6 spd tranny with REALLY EXPENSIVE chain drive option, 5 lug spindles/16 or 17 inch rims/corresponding rotors and calipers, lotsa CF, Ti, Al, Mg and a sprig of Mo simmered until well done, and 125 lbs less blubber!

[jerpinoy]

This is my stat for 2014= 1400 3 cylinder
2015=1500 3 cylinder
2016=1600 4 cylinder

[DragonLorD]

I never would've guessed.

It is a good machine, it's fun, moderately fast, I like mine. I'd like A LOT MORE THOUGH; I don't expect any, however, and ALMT is obviously not everyone's flavor. All the more reason to increase the product sub-line (RS/RSSs) and likely the new customers that would be attracted to it. On the off chance they do some day produce a FrankenSpyder, or some variation thereof....................you won't be allowed to buy one; as you're actually quite happy with the RS as designed. Aaaaaahhhhh an entire 100 HP. An amount not witnessed by humanity until the Japanese started making 600 cc sport bikes.

I've only activated the nanny under two conditions. Can't do burn outs worth a on it when it starts to side step. Can't do donuts worth a on it either. Defeatable VSS and TC give one the option of living with them or not. For those who're satisfied with things as they're designed.........................the safe route is to leave it on, I guess. The VSS is likely on the Spyder for two reasons. It almost certainly does make the Spyder safer (man, that word is popping up a lot!) under some conditions. The second is BRP has not failed to notice the complete dearth of three wheeled ATVs in the US. I'm sure some remember them. They used to exist before morons everywhere and the ambulance chasers who lined up behind them sued the three wheeled ATVs out of production because they were unsafe for morons to operate like morons. Can you say, "Product Liability"? VSS is a self defensive measure for BRP, and it does make the Spyder safer......................for them. I don't resent that; it's a valid fear, or concern, on their part when dealing with a US customer base, ..................and all the ambulance chasers behind them.

I've had two high speed motorcycle accidents (in excess of 60 MPH), one of which involved a rather uncooperative tree, one medium speed accident (ATV-4 wheeled kind............but only because there were no three wheelers to be owned by then) also involving a tree (gotta work on NOT doing that), and one really stupid low speed accident. Whatever costs insurance didn't pay, I did. The low speeder cost me about $22,000.00 out of pocket. I wasn't very happy with myself for that one. I could have lawyered up on any of them I suppose, but in the end the only real common causative factor was the moron operating the throttle. Unlike most; I didn't sue anyone else for my mistakes. No one had to put additional cautionary or disclaimer decals on their product because of me.

OMG!!!!! I hadn't thought about the huge additional cost of putting a convertible mount on the output shaft so you either mount a flange and belt, or a sprocket and chain. That would really be over the cost edge, on 220 HP Spyder with carbon fiber, titanium, magnesium, and aluminum all over it to get it's blubber down. Point taken.

Did I mention I actually like my RSS, and it's a lot of fun to ride? Because it is..................but it would be A LOT MORE FUN though with A LOT MORE! It's the American way! I don't think my wish list is that outrageous; it'd really be kinda like the ZR1, or Viper model of Spyder.

One other thing.....................they really need to attract more A LOT MORE younger riders because their current customer base is DIEING before their very eyes. Kinda like Buick owners.

OK..................I'm off my soap box now; gotta go ride my bicycle into a tree..........................oh wait; I said bicycle; won't be going that fast. How much CAN it hurt?

200+ RWHP, 6 spd tranny with REALLY EXPENSIVE chain drive option, 5 lug spindles/16 or 17 inch rims/corresponding rotors and calipers, lotsa CF, Ti, Al, Mg and a sprig of Mo simmered until well done, and 125 lbs less blubber!

i feel you bro all the way

i think you got a same condition as i do - they call it a "Right-Hand-Thritis" over here

[Bob Denman]

They could also (After giving the RS-S an infusion of power and technology), reposition the bas RS as a beginner's ride...
The ACE600 inline twin under the Tupperware...
Now they'de have a serious decision to make:
SE or SM transmission?
The SM would be cheaper
The SE would attract new riders due to easier operation...
Which way would YOU like to see them go with it?

[DragonLorD]

They could also (After giving the RS-S an infusion of power and technology), reposition the bas RS as a beginner's ride...
The ACE600 inline twin under the Tupperware...
Now they'de have a serious decision to make:
SE or SM transmission?
The SM would be cheaper
The SE would attract new riders due to easier operation...
Which way would YOU like to see them go with it?

from my own experience, riding manuals all the time when i got my hands on the Spyder with SE5 it was a love on first sight and never looked back since, transmission on both SE and SM is exact the same it's just the addition of SE module what makes a difference and BRP charges well for that however as it was mentioned here before i don't see price of Spyder to be relevant at all here, all of us who wanted a Spyder got one if we could afford it and those who couldn't waited a bit for second hand ones. Also i can't see any of BRP products to be cheap or affordable even, they all pretty much on the top with prices.
150 hp power unit with 150 mph max at least and 180 mph for super-charged limited edition and nanny works from 35 mph up only, able to do 0-60 in less than 3.5s and be able to keep up with the rest of the wolfs there after - that is all i truly believe it takes to attract sporty riders to Spyder market

[Dochands]

Very disappointed that the RS is the poor forgotten entry level bike now. The RT has always seemed bloated to me in comparison to its original cousin and I have never wanted one. But the power has gone to the RT and nothing has really changed on the RS.

Curiously, the Rotax engineer from Germany who rode my turbo a couple of years ago said they could and would make one if there was interest but I fear the RS as a superbike is a dream because grandpa wants to pretend to be young forever on his RT. So the money will pour into the RT and the RS will probably just disappear.

[DragonLorD]

Very disappointed that the RS is the poor forgotten entry level bike now. The RT has always seemed bloated to me in comparison to its original cousin and I have never wanted one. But the power has gone to the RT and nothing has really changed on the RS.

Curiously, the Rotax engineer from Germany who rode my turbo a couple of years ago said they could and would make one if there was interest but I fear the RS as a superbike is a dream because grandpa wants to pretend to be young forever on his RT. So the money will pour into the RT and the RS will probably just disappear.

you couldn't have said it better,

how much difference turbo gives you in comparison to stock? - reliability?

[otter28169]

Very disappointed that the RS is the poor forgotten entry level bike now. The RT has always seemed bloated to me in comparison to its original cousin and I have never wanted one. But the power has gone to the RT and nothing has really changed on the RS.

Curiously, the Rotax engineer from Germany who rode my turbo a couple of years ago said they could and would make one if there was interest but I fear the RS as a superbike is a dream because grandpa wants to pretend to be young forever on his RT. So the money will pour into the RT and the RS will probably just disappear.

As an RS-S owner, maybe I should get used to being disappointed . But I am going to make sure they here me before they kill the best model of the bunch.

[Dochands]

There have been issues with the turbo. Had to add a Powercommander and it still is not set up entirely right. Again it is good technology but Hi Performance has never received the interest they hoped for so it is languishing like the RS.

A six speed 1330 RS would be sweet but I don't hold out much hope but a year from now we will all know.

[daveinva]

A six speed 1330 RS would be sweet but I don't hold out much hope but a year from now we will all know.

Again, if the reports of the 1330 are right, NONE of you gentlemen want it in the RS-- it's all torque and grunt, not HP and RPM.

Of course they can re-tune it, but if you all are after a "liter sportsbike" engine in the RS, I'd be genuinely surprised if the 1330 will scratch that itch.

Besides, does anyone even know if this engine will even fit under the RS skin yet?

[spydaman60]

Again, if the reports of the 1330 are right, NONE of you gentlemen want it in the RS-- it's all torque and grunt, not HP and RPM.

Of course they can re-tune it, but if you all are after a "liter sportsbike" engine in the RS, I'd be genuinely surprised if the 1330 will scratch that itch.

Besides, does anyone even know if this engine will even fit under the RS skin yet?

most likely it wouldn't fit under the hood, but if it did, the 6 speed and the additional mileage would be well worth the wait. (not to mention the longer service intervals)

[Orange monster]

One problem with a turbocharged spyder would be location of the turbo. If they tried to locate it under the plastic then you are just adding more heat. Turbo's generate a lot of heat and require cool air to perform at their best. Most companies are using intercoolers to help cool the incoming air. The existing turbo system for the spyder is located outside the plastic on the exhaust/muffler pipe and is not very attractive. If Yamaha, Suzuki, and Kawasaki can all build bike motors in the 1000cc range that put out 150hp to 200hp NA surely Can am can too.

[Kratos]

You guys are upset now.....but they are gonna blow you away next year. Mark my words.......something BIG is brewing for the RS. Mark my words....